Garland appoints Special Counsel to investigate Mike Pence.

[DURHAM D]

Just kidding but it needs to happen given that Pence plans to run for office again.

[Fiendish Thingy]

1. If Pence declares, then appointing a Special Counsel would be appropriate. Nt

[W_HAMILTON]

18. No. A special counsel should be appointed regardless.

Biden hasn't officially declared he is running in 2024 and yet he got one, so, no, that is not the standard.

[tritsofme]

21. When you're the incumbent president and putative leader of the executive branch

Id say that generally qualifies.

[W_HAMILTON]

23. There sure seems to be a lot of carve-outs and special rules here to justify the unjustifiable.

Trump declared, so he got a special counsel.

Biden hasn't declared, but he's the incumbent president, so he gets one too.

Newsflash: there's history of incumbent presidents being investigated by their DOJ/FBI without need of a special counsel, so I don't buy that one either.

Pence should get a special counsel and, if not, Garland should be asked his thought process into exactly why he appointed one for Trump and then Biden but not Pence. He should clarify all these special carve-outs and made-up-as-he-goes-along rules so that he can be held to them going forward.

[tritsofme]

24. It seems perfectly reasonable and justifiable to me.

But then again, I don’t have some weird agenda/complex against Garland.

[Ohio Joe]

25. +1 - nt

[W_HAMILTON]

26. Do you realize how many investigations the DOJ/FBI has done against candidates running for office...

...without the need for a special counsel?

Once again, if that's now Garland's DOJ's rule, he should state so. He should explicitly state what the requirements are to appoint a special counsel so everyone knows going forward.

Fact of the matter is, he didn't need to appoint a special counsel for the Trump investigation and he didn't need to appoint one for Biden (once again, there is history of the DOJ/FBI investigating matters involving their president without the need for a special counsel).

But he did, and therefore Pence should receive one as well. If his special carve-out rule that everyone is stating on his behalf is that he needs special counsels to investigate candidates for federal office -- even though, once again, Biden has not officially declared he is running, but people just add in another random carve-out to explain that one away -- there's a few Republican congressmen that are believed to be under investigation that should also have special counsels appointed for them...

[Fiendish Thingy]

27. Biden is a sitting president

As was Trump when Meuller was appointed.

C’mon man, this isnt that complicated to understand.

[W_HAMILTON]

29. It apparently is...

...since you forgot, the DOJ/FBI was investigating the Trump campaign for its ties to Russia BEFORE a special counsel was appointed and one was only appointed AFTER the extraordinary circumstance of Trump firing the person overseeing that and other investigations into Trump and his associates.

And Reno investigated Clinton/Gore in the mid-1990s involving allegations of campaign finance abuse without the need for a special counsel.

[Fiendish Thingy]

31. Reno's investigation was a preliminary review, then closed

Unlike Biden’s preliminary review , which ended up justifying the appointment of a SC.

You want to be angry about unequal treatment, different standards for different people, and, at least with Garland, there aren’t any.

[W_HAMILTON]

32. A review that determined there was no reason to believe a crime had been committed.

Are you saying that Garland's review has determined that a crime was committed and therefore that is why one was appointed?

And what is your special carve-out rule for the DOJ/FBI investigating Trump and his campaign BEFORE a special counsel was appointed, which was only appointed AFTER Trump fired the guy overseeing those investigations? Hmm?

[Fiendish Thingy]

34. Your presumption of the reason Meuller was appointed isn't entirely correct

Yes, Comey’s firing was a factor, but it was Sessions’ recusal that was the triggering event for Rosenstein to appoint him.

Again, you seem to need to find something unfair in the SC process to be angry about, so have at it, I’m not here to stop you. I’m just pointing out some common misconceptions about Special Counsels.

[W_HAMILTON]

38. You have argued yourself in circles now.

So, if Comey had not been fired and Sessions did not recuse, what would have happened?

The DOJ/FBI would have continued its investigation into the Trump campaign for its ties to Russia -- WITHOUT the need for a special counsel.

Thank you for proving my point, even if inadvertently.

It was the extraordinary circumstances that began with Trump firing Comey that led to the special counsel, NOT simply the DOJ/FBI investigating their sitting president, as they are well within their ability to do WITHOUT the need for a special counsel.

[Thomas Hurt]

2. I believe that is exactly what should be done.

[fightforfreedom]

3. Lol, good one.

[Emile]

5. I thought this was for real.

[Beachnutt]

6. And do a "Special Bulletin" announcement

on all tv too.

[GenXer47]

7. soon they'll have to recruit investigators from The Lego Movie

[AkFemDem]

8. This is going to create a new college major

The future job outlook for Special Council majors is bright!

[DURHAM D]

10. I like that.

[agingdem]

15. a new law school course of study...

and a guaranteed job with the DOJ...

[Rebl2]

9. Yep

[Jrose]

11. Pence's docs

Doesn't it seem that more classified docs are suddenly sprouting wherever Trump's political enemies reside?!

[MOMFUDSKI]

12. Things are out of control in

our Country. This is getting scary. Too much skullduggery for my taste.

[BlackSkimmer]

20. Yes.

Something is very wrong.

[W_HAMILTON]

16. Actually, why hasn't he appointed one?

If Garland believes the DOJ cannot adequately and competently investigate Trump on their own, and then that extended to Biden, why does he believe they can investigate Pence regarding these same matters?

So, yes, no irony here, a special counsel should be appointed. If Garland felt that he needed to appoint one for Biden because he appointed one for Trump -- which, let's be honest, is exactly what happened here -- then Pence should have one appointed for his situation as well.

[peppertree]

17. It would "look partisan"

And we can't have that, now can we - at least, on the Democratic end.

Repugs? They can show-trial us to death (as the Clintons can attest), and it's "just politics."

[W_HAMILTON]

19. It looks partisan if they don't appoint one for Pence.

At this point, Garland has painted himself in this corner by trying to appear """fair""" in appointing these silly special counsels to begin with. Trump should not have received one for simply declaring his candidacy -- which, should be noted, he probably did specifically to get this sort of special treatment -- and Biden should not have received one simply because Trump had one and Garland felt the need to appear """fair."""

So, at this point, any officials with leftover classified documents in their home should be appointed a special counsel to investigate. It's idiotic, but Garland brought about this idiocy from his own idiotic actions.

[peppertree]

22. Absolutely

But this man seems guided by, above all, irrational fears - and those are, well, irrational.

Repugs, meanwhile, are plotting their Latin America-style revenge: Wait until you're in power - and then witch-hunt, expedition-fish, and kangaroo-court the other side to death (with RW media cheerleading all the way).

[Fiendish Thingy]

28. Special counsels are typically appointed for sitting presidents/VP's or candidates

Pence is neither.

You might want to check your own understanding of the rationale for appointing special counsels before labeling Garland an idiot.

[W_HAMILTON]

30. Wrong. Usually only under extraordinary circumstances.

Case in point, there was no special counsel investigation into Trump until AFTER he fired the guy overseeing ONGOING investigations into him and his campaign associates for their ties to Russia. If Trump had not fired Comey, the DOJ/FBI would still have been investigating the matter WITHOUT NEED FOR A SPECIAL COUNSEL.

And Janet Reno investigated and cleared Clinton/Gore of allegations of campaign finance abuse in the mid-1990s.

There is no precedent that a special counsel must be used to investigate a sitting president.

And I can give you a long list of candidates for federal office that did not have a special counsel appointed for them. Does the name Hillary ring a bell?

So, you might want to check your own understanding of history before trying to call someone out.

[Fiendish Thingy]

33. Can you give me a list of private citizens investigated by Special Counsels?

Who weren’t federal employees or connected to political campaigns or candidates?

Also, why do you think a SC is needed for Pence?

[W_HAMILTON]

35. What does being a private citizen have to do with it?

Once again, what the hell is it with you all and inventing these random-ass carve-outs? It's incumbent on YOU to show where the hell ever has a special counsel been automatically appointed simply because someone declared their candidacy for federal office like happened with Trump? Hillary didn't get that treatment. Indicted Republican congressmen in the past did not get that treatment. There are several suspected Republican congressmen that may be under investigation now that didn't get that treatment. So, why did Trump?

As for why a special counsel is needed for Pence, it is because it the same criminal matter that he just recently appointed two other special counsels for, which means that it would require Garland himself to explain these carve-outs he is inventing as he goes along. Never before has someone running for federal office automatically triggered a special counsel, so why did it for Trump? There have been cases before where the DOJ/FBI were investigating their president without a special counsel being appointed, so why do it for Biden?

Garland himself should be the one to navigate the maze of ridiculousness that he himself as created. And he should clarify whether or not he is enshrining it in DOJ policy, so we at least know ahead of time whether this is one-off bullshit special rules made up just by him that will promptly be discarded by the next Republican administration or can everyone expect to play by these rules going forward?

[Fiendish Thingy]

37. Rage On- I'll leave you in the capable hands of the Temptations

Maybe they can help you sort things out:

[liberalmediaaddict]

36. LMAO

Well according to Garland's logic he HAS to appoint another special counsel.

[Paladin]

39. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! (nt)